I’m not mad. But the context around South Africa is interesting. The questions around the court really only being able to bring charges against recognized nations and not Palestine or Hamas is interesting. It’s important to put this ruling in the larger context of world events and politics. Also the context of Israel actually showing up unlike Russia is important. I don’t think the tone of the article is about being sour about the result, but the need for consistency.
Given the dreadful toll of civilian deaths in Gaza, reportedly now topping 25,000, Israel should answer questions about its conduct. Every member of the United Nations’ 1948 Genocide Convention has an obligation to raise concerns if they have evidence that a group of people is at risk of genocide. Given previous catastrophic failures to prevent genocide—in Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur—more referrals to the court could be good news for the protection of civilians at risk. And unlike Russia, against which Ukraine made a complaint to the court in February 2022, Israel has indicated that it takes the charges seriously, attending the court to dispute the accusation.
I’m not mad. But the context around South Africa is interesting. The questions around the court really only being able to bring charges against recognized nations and not Palestine or Hamas is interesting. It’s important to put this ruling in the larger context of world events and politics. Also the context of Israel actually showing up unlike Russia is important. I don’t think the tone of the article is about being sour about the result, but the need for consistency.